Rolling With the Sim-Floors

[repentantandy]

Despite the fact that his site still has a whole bunch of questionable photos of plane debris and body parts, Phil Jayhan is now aggressively pushing the meme that not only were the towers mostly, if not completely, devoid of tenants on 9/11, but that lots of the supposed 110, above-ground concrete floors were never even completed when the construction period ended in the early 1970s.

He's got supposed photos from that period to back up this wild claim plus an alleged eyewitness (from a childhood, behind-the-scenes tour) who recalls seeing vast, empty spaces inside the completed structure of one of the towers, too.

Various mainstream sources can be found online for the story of members of the mysterious "art students" project known as "Gelatin B" spending time as rent-free guests of the Port Authority in the months just prior to the "attack". And their final piece of "performance art" is said to have involved simulating suicide-jumpers and photographing the students' antics with professional video shot from a rented helicopter that circled the towers in the early-morning hours.

(Gathering template material for future video fakery perhaps....?)

Mr. Jayhan and a buddy have already guested twice on Dr. Fetzer's radio show promoting the art-students-cavorting-in-the-hollow-towers theory, and their appearance on the Fetzer show was facilitated by a previous guest (from Canada!) who also spoke very favorably of September Clues!

:rolleyes:

[hoi.polloi]

Yes, I would definitely be rolling my round little, beady black simulated smiley eyes at such a story at this point.

:rolleyes:

Now that September Clues has proven to be the single-most evidence-based theory on what happened (basically, that we don't know what happened and we have to start from that stand point if we are going to analyze the evidence with any clarity) all these fellows want to possess it and suck up to it.

I believe we didn't know what was going on at the time, but that doesn't mean I can't be convinced. It's just that we have to look at how this information is being presented to us.

If there's some kind of "privileged information" about it coming from The New York Times and such luminary career martyr drama queens as Kevin Barrett, who gets on Fox News to look whiny and accuse Fox of spewing venom (how would that be permitted exactly?), then we must ask why.

The "artist group" idea is tied up with a fake announcement on his show that the art students were MOSSAD in disguise (Jon Elinoff, to tell the story the way it is recorded here http://thepopulist.net/?p=2619)) which was then transformed into the Gelatin announcement and torn apart. Anything even touching Kevin Barrett or Jim Fetzer at this point makes neon orange warning flags shoot up for me.

If you want to talk about straw men being dangled in front of us to latch onto, the "performance art group" hypothesis seems like one of them. Another drama to invest in, and be controlled by. You should have seen the e-mail list Simon and I were attached to without our permission by this odd "Clara Kuhn" spook, who basically read pieces of the Vicsim Report using a personal interpretation, tying its credibility to that of "other no-victim theorists" and said it had been written by a woman named "Betty Brick". :D :lol: :P Huh???

We simply do not have credible sources for new evidence to be introduced, nor credible sources for any of this retro-active history building. Just people trying to embrace our good research and run off with it in some different directions, maybe even planting info directly from the perp playbook. (What ever happened to the obvious Securacom Bush crime family connection, anyway? Now it's all foreign powers "f#cking with" America and "framing" the executive branch of USA? That sounds like laughable Nico Haupt-like distractions to me.)

As for MOSSAD, everyone knows they are most definitely informed if not involved in policy things like this, but I personally don't think we need the "art group" story to "prove" it. Just look at our military history with Israel and you know if the USA military was involved, MOSSAD knew about it and probably helped, if not devised.

But I feel this "art group info" might be trying to get some of the real guys off the hook.

[antipodean]

Now that September Clues has proven to be the single-most evidence-based theory on what happened (basically, that we don't know what happened and we have to start from that stand point if we are going to analyze the evidence with any clarity) all these fellows want to possess it and suck up to it

These 3 part videos from the link below illustrate this point. Here we have someone sucking up to September Clues, so he can use it for his own pet theory & get his 15 minutes of fame.
(The pod under UA175 being the ball with a CGI plane attatched to it.)

At the beginning of part 3. Poor old Phil Jayhan is interviwed, desperately hanging onto his pod theory.

http://uncensored.co.nz/2010/08/13/new- ... /#comments

[godzilla]

Now that September Clues has proven to be the single-most evidence-based theory on what happened (basically, that we don't know what happened and we have to start from that stand point if we are going to analyze the evidence with any clarity) all these fellows want to possess it and suck up to it

These 3 part videos from the link below illustrate this point. Here we have someone sucking up to September Clues, so he can use it for his own pet theory & get his 15 minutes of fame.
(The pod under UA175 being the ball with a CGI plane attatched to it.)

At the beginning of part 3. Poor old Phil Jayhan is interviwed, desperately hanging onto his pod theory.

http://uncensored.co.nz/2010/08/13/new- ... /#comments

Desperately hanging onto his pod theory, or yet another shill sowing more seeds of confusion/distraction with spin-off, crazy 'theories', put forth in an attempt to discredit S. Clues.

[simonshack]

Richard Hall called me on skype and we had a very civil conversation.

He told me he was a newbie to the research (he discovered September Clues quite recently). He works for the Trident Nuclear Program in the UK.

I told him the "BALL" is just a goofily animated video segment of the "16 second magic sequence": http://z6.invisionfree.com/Reality_Shac ... =289&st=30

We parted in a civil manner. ;)

[brianv]

Is that the Richard D Hall of UFO and Crop Circle fame?

"His conclusions are that (1) the videos and photographs supplied to the television networks after the event were all staged or doctored; (2) the few witnesses who actually described seeing airplanes were hired to say what they said; (3) a circular, anti-gravity vehicle, seen in only one of the undoctored videos, packed with high explosives, is what actually hit the building.

Hall believes that the 9/11 conspirators used a secret anti-gravity craft such as has been developed at Area 51 to slam into the building and then doctored the videos after, introducing airplanes, and sending these faked videos to the media."

http://www.richplanet.net/detail.php?dbindex=207

http://factsnotfairies.blogspot.com/201 ... um=twitter

I think this is exactly what Godzy was saying "or yet another shill sowing more seeds of confusion/distraction with spin-off, crazy 'theories', put forth in an attempt to discredit S. Clues. "

[repentantandy]

So now we've got a curious situation in which one of the most notorious plane-huggers (Mr. Jayhan and his Let's Roll Forum), at one time a very shilly-acting opponent of the central video-fakery premise of September Clues, has come round, nevertheless, to embrace and promote the vicsim discoveries of Reality Shack!!

What's next?

Will Jeff Hill and the PumpBoys announce their sudden (Damascus-Road style) conversion to vicsim believers, too?

Lately they've spent an enormous amount of effort (with loads of recorded phone calls to "witnesses") trying to defend the Pentagon OCT from the disturbing predations of the CIT crew, but the HillBillies have pretty much shied away (except for a very few snide-side references) from attacking the Vicsim Report at all.

Maybe this stands as testament to their CIA/MI6/Mossad controllers having been much better prepared to defend the massive TV deceptions of 9/11 (with oodles of pre-scripted, specious arguments about parallax, motion-blur, PAL-conversion, etc.) than the the ultra-shoddy photo-slopping of the "glorious trainwreck"-filled, memorial-site fakery.

;)

[simonshack]

So now we've got a curious situation in which one of the most notorious plane-huggers (Mr. Jayhan and his Let's Roll Forum), at one time a very shilly-acting opponent of the central video-fakery premise of September Clues, has come round, nevertheless, to embrace and promote the vicsim discoveries of Reality Shack!!

What's next?

Will Jeff Hill and the PumpBoys announce their sudden (Damascus-Road style) conversion to vicsim believers, too?

Lately they've spent an enormous amount of effort (with loads of recorded phone calls to "witnesses") trying to defend the Pentagon OCT from the disturbing predations of the CIT crew, but the HillBillies have pretty much shied away (except for a very few snide-side references) from attacking the Vicsim Report at all.

Maybe this stands as testament to their CIA/MI6/Mossad controllers having been much better prepared to defend the massive TV deceptions of 9/11 (with oodles of pre-scripted, specious arguments about parallax, motion-blur, PAL-conversion, etc.) than the the ultra-shoddy photo-slopping of the "glorious trainwreck"-filled, memorial-site fakery.

;)

"Photo-slopping" ?

That's a classic neologism! You should copyright it.

Yes, Repentandy. We are probably witnessing the crash of the 9/11 gatekeeping crew - on LIVE Worldwide Web !

It's about time we get to be eye-witnesses too ... :lol:

[reel.deal]

http://k4a4.com//wtc-attacks-photos.htm

[carcdr]

Regardless of the above comments, the idea that the Towers were hollow is one of the best/simplest explanations of the missing contents at GZ that I've encountered. (I've studied a lot of ideas and gone down a lot of ratholes.)

The Hollow Towers idea dove-tails wonderfully with the vicsim ideas uncovered in this forum, albeit Jayhan, et al, appear to miss the full significance of the connections to this vicsim research.

The Towers were, essentially, fakes. Hollow fakes.

The hollow Towers' deconstruction needed to be covered up. CGI.

War-mongery requires mass emotion. Jumpers. Gelatin-B probably provided the prototypes / models for the jumper CGI illusions. I doubt that the jumpers were "live" on 911, but maybe Gelatin-B provided CGI body models, wrapped by CGI artists, before that day.

[nonhocapito]

The Towers were, essentially, fakes. Hollow fakes.

Uhm...
Maybe not the strongest argument (others based on logic are better) but I have known someone who told me she had visited the twin towers before 9/11 and had been on the top floor of one of them when she was in New York for study at the end of the '90s.
She told how she had beautiful memories, went back to the place a couple of times (maybe she was at "windows of the world"? this I don't know) and loved the sight so she was even more shocked on 9/11 blah blah.
I kind of believe, through her, that at least one of towers had at least some activity in it at the ground and top floors. Plus many other floors as well, because tourists can be sheeps but they're not always stupid, and might notice the lack of business.

[ozzybinoswald]

The Towers were, essentially, fakes. Hollow fakes.

Uhm...
Maybe not the strongest argument (others based on logic are better)

Logic huh? And you'll decide what are admissible premises?

Tell me what businesses were filling the towers? Were those companies full of busy people who now comprise the victim list?

[nonhocapito]

Tell me what businesses were filling the towers?

Why should I know? All I know is that this friend of mine said she was there on the top floor as a tourist. End of story.
I have no reason to think that she, an italian teacher of no importance whatsoever, had any particular reason to tell me, a nobody myself, a lie about this. That's my whole argument, against the hollow towers theory, as I said not very strong because it can't be really proved, but that maybe attaches itself to one that has a bit of logic, which is the following: the WTC was supposedly open to tourists, and the tourists would have noticed if nobody (really nobody) walked in and out of offices or elevators.

Now if you have arguments to demonstrate that this business of the tourists is a total lie, and tourists were not allowed to visit the towers, well, I'd be a little shocked and have to think that my friend was a liar, a mythomaniac, maybe an agent, and wonder how and why...

Anyhow, I was under the impression that almost everyone on this thread was against the idea that the towers were completely empty and hollow (I don't obviously mean on the day of 9/11, but generally empty or hollow as a rule). So what makes you think the contrary?

P.s. In case it was not clear, "maybe not the strongest argument" refers to my own words following the parenthesis.

[fred]

I remember having a meeting with Goldman Sachs at the WTC about a year before 9/11/2001, and years earlier I had been up in the tourist elevator. I suspect that even though calling the towers "hollow fakes" might be a bit of an exaggeration, that occupancy was indeed low, especially after the 1993 bombing. Certainly there was plenty of space (and time!) for the towers to get rigged up for the big show well in advance.

I'm open to the idea that the "twin towers" were purpose-built for some grandiose millennium plan.

On the other hand, once they obtained white elephant status, the WTC complex may have just been a convenient backdrop for the psyop of the century.

When you've got cooperation from the media, the government, the police, and the building owners, the actual demolition part is easy. Clearly nobody has been in a great hurry to rebuild anything on the empty site given that it's still sitting there vacant nine years later. Look at any other patch of vacant land in North America: You'd expect a theme park, a Walmart, and a strip mall at least by now.

[nonhocapito]

I remember having a meeting with Goldman Sachs at the WTC about a year before 9/11/2001, and years earlier I had been up in the tourist elevator. I suspect that even though calling the towers "hollow fakes" might be a bit of an exaggeration, that occupancy was indeed low, especially after the 1993 bombing. Certainly there was plenty of space (and time!) for the towers to get rigged up for the big show well in advance.

I'm open to the idea that the "twin towers" were purpose-built for some grandiose millennium plan.

On the other hand, once they obtained white elephant status, the WTC complex may have just been a convenient backdrop for the psyop of the century.

When you've got cooperation from the media, the government, the police, and the building owners, the actual demolition part is easy. Clearly nobody has been in a great hurry to rebuild anything on the empty site given that it's still sitting there vacant nine years later. Look at any other patch of vacant land in North America: You'd expect a theme park, a Walmart, and a strip mall at least by now.

I agree that the towers must have been with low occupancy... probably a largely failing business that had to be converted into a very profiting one. (I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years we will be informed that the freedom tower or whatever it is called will never be built because of some foundation problem or something.)

Can you fill me in on the tourist elevator? Is it true you stopped halfway and changed elevator in order to get to the top? What floor did it stopped? Did it gave any glimpse on the activity in the towers or was it sealed off from the business side? Was "windows of the world" on the same tower and open to tourists?